MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885148117 · doi:10.1142/s0219649218500338

High-Dimensional Text Datasets Clustering Algorithm Based on Cuckoo Search and Latent Semantic Indexing

2018· article· en· W2885148117 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Saida Ishak Boushaki, Nadjet Kamel, Omar Bendjeghaba

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Information & Knowledge Management · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Clustering Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConcordia University
KeywordsComputer scienceCluster analysisCuckoo searchData miningSearch engine indexingDocument clusteringClustering high-dimensional dataCurse of dimensionalitySpectral clusteringArtificial intelligenceMachine learningParticle swarm optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The clustering is an important data analysis technique. However, clustering high-dimensional data like documents needs more effort in order to extract the richness relevant information hidden in the multidimensionality space. Recently, document clustering algorithms based on metaheuristics have demonstrated their efficiency to explore the search area and to achieve the global best solution rather than the local one. However, most of these algorithms are not practical and suffer from some limitations, including the requirement of the knowledge of the number of clusters in advance, they are neither incremental nor extensible and the documents are indexed by high-dimensional and sparse matrix. In order to overcome these limitations, we propose in this paper, a new dynamic and incremental approach (CS_LSI) for document clustering based on the recent cuckoo search (CS) optimization and latent semantic indexing (LSI). Conducted Experiments on four well-known high-dimensional text datasets show the efficiency of LSI model to reduce the dimensionality space with more precision and less computational time. Also, the proposed CS_LSI determines the number of clusters automatically by employing a new proposed index, focused on significant distance measure. This later is also used in the incremental mode and to detect the outlier documents by maintaining a more coherent clusters. Furthermore, comparison with conventional document clustering algorithms shows the superiority of CS_LSI to achieve a high quality of clustering.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Information & Knowledge ManagementSame topicAdvanced Clustering Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207